Town Square

Superintendent evaluation Feb. 6

Original post made
by Thumbs up or down?, Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Jan 17, 2014

Well, it's that time again, time for Dana Tom, Barb Mitchell, Camille Townsend, Melissa Caswell, and Heidi Emberling to decide to give Kevin Skelly another $300,000 for his leadership of PAUSD. I believe all of the votes have been 5-0 in support of Skelly's contracts and extensions, but please post corrections if you have other information. Has he delivered $300,000 worth of leadership in the last 12 months and does he deserve another contract extension? Or does he need to be given notice on February 6 that he will be gone by June 30? It's not up to you or me, it's up to the five board members. Post your respectful and truthful comments below.

Posted by An F-
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 17, 2014 at 11:42 pm

I already give him an F-, but I know that the board members will give him a B+ or A- because they would not want to acept that he did all those awful things he did. He was bad since the beginning but we ignore the signs. Remember when he had the guts to express his low expectation for English learners and students of color. He said something like they cound not learn as good as English learners. He was a bad superintendent since the beginning. But we pretended that everything was fine, and now we are finally realizing that he was not the best choice for our students. They were the most affected by this poor choice.

Posted by Parent
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 18, 2014 at 7:34 am

Over time, I've come to realize Skelly is not so bad, but I think both he and the district would be better off without Charles Young, Brenda Carrillo, and a few others who are making him look bad and underperforming, but they're very good at keeping on his good side. Every organization has those people who are poisonous to the org but great at looking good for the leadership. They're not hard to spot from below. Our leadership is too hierarchical in general, it's a bad match for this population. Don't think that's Skelly's fault.

Posted by Management 101
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jan 18, 2014 at 9:40 am

Parent, the people you mention are Kevin Skelly's handpicked executive team. They are his direct reports. If they are underperforming, he is responsible. Does no one in this town understand how management works?

Posted by Paly Alum
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 19, 2014 at 12:53 amPaly Alum is a registered user.

$300,000? Seriously?! I disliked the fact that Skelly allowed the Barron Park Elementary principal and her colleagues to bully him into supporting the deficient Everyday Math program. I recall a meeting at Nixon where he said, "Let's have a poll. Who doesn't support Everyday Math? Raise your hands." And then a woman said, "No, no polling" and did not allow it. Who's the leader? We need someone who will take charge and improve our schools. The only reason Everyday Math has not failed our students is that the teachers have been able to interpret it and modify the program so it's not so confusing. Otherwise, the program on its own is a failure nationwide.

Perhaps the Board Members see what he is doing behind-the-scenes that we are unaware of - maybe it's good, but I don't think our schools have improved at all and I've served on secondary school PTAs and we weren't impressed. He is a nice person, and hopefully the BoE can look past that and evaluate him on his service.